5 ms·

I was a horrible student as a child, and in my 20s I strongly held the belief that education was broken. Now that I'm a few decades older I wonder if my problem

by madrox 4mo ago

I was a horrible student as a child, and in my 20s I strongly held the belief that education was broken. Now that I'm a few decades older I wonder if my problem was not education but life. I did not fit in at most schools, and that had a negative effect on my desire and ability to learn. That's what led me to teach myself computers as a teenager...education and online socialization combined. Win/win. I think the author is right that education isn't the problem, but they don't really discuss is the social element of schools. Bullying. Ostrification. I'm not really sure how schools are expected to fix that.

pokstad 4mo ago
There’s something lopsided about education for boys. The system appears to favor girls heavily. There’s projections that college student populations will have shrinking male population. I think this is a systemic issue with school being built to favor a certain philosophy that isn’t well thought out for 50% of the population.
- XorNot 4mo ago
  What philosophy? The gender based outcomes people never seem able to come up with any coherent explanation of what they think the problem is other then to play to stereotypes.
  - bilbo0s 4mo ago
    This. A math test is a math test is a math test. What's the math teacher supposed to do? I hate to be that guy, but I think it should be pointed out that asian boys don't seem to have much of a problem. If there's a gender bias, why do they succeed?
    - s5300 4mo ago
      [dead]
  - rootusrootus 4mo ago
    The explanation that I’ve seen floated is behavioral. Boys are active and physical and don’t focus as easily as girls, who are more amenable to sitting quietly and paying attention. The idea is that the current predominant K12 style favors students in the latter behavior group. I have two kids in K12 and I don’t think it’s that simple. Not that I have a good explanation of my own, mind you.
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
    - jplusequalt 4mo ago
      >who are more amenable to sitting quietly and paying attention Is this explanation not making a blatant assumption here that girls are statistically less hyperactive and distracted than boys?
      - rootusrootus 4mo ago
        Is that controversial (assuming otherwise normal children, excluding anybody with ADHD, etc)?
      - rocmcd 4mo ago
        "Hyperactive and distracted" is not necessarily the exact reason, but there is a large, well documented gap in performance for boys vs girls in elementary school (at least in the US).
  - Avicebron 4mo ago
    > What philosophy? They might be referring to the TED Radio Hour "Beyond the manosphere" by Richard Reeves. I think it was on NPR a while ago, I looked it up because the "school isn't designed for boys but girls" sounded familiar.
  - smelendez 4mo ago
    What confuses me is that the education system, especially the college track, was designed for men and boys. Lots of colleges didn’t even admit women, and they were largely excluded from learned professions like medicine, law, the ministry, engineering, etc. I haven’t really seen a good argument for what changed. I guess it’s possible that the school system was originally designed to teach young men skills, like quiet study and deference to authority, that women either learn more naturally or get reinforced in other contexts, and the schools no longer effectively teach those skills but still reward them.
- rootusrootus 4mo ago
  > projections that college student populations will have shrinking male population Projections? Aren’t we already there in reality? That future is today.
- fasterik 4mo ago
  It's not that the system favors a particular gender. The system favors personality traits like self-regulation, organization, and conscientiousness. These traits develop earlier on average in girls than in boys.
  - parpfish 4mo ago
    i'm not sure if it's an issue of the educational system, but for at least several decades there has been a societal push to correct historical gender imbalances by encouraging girls to do well in school, go to college (especially STEM), get a career. This has resulted in kids seeing a lot of messaging along the lines of "Girl Power! Girls can do anything!". Which to an adult looks like a shift in the tides of history, but for one of the kids that's all they've ever seen and i think that has an effect.
    - fasterik 4mo ago
      It turns out that when you level the playing field, girls do better than boys. I don't think it's about the "girl power" nonsense, it's about the ability to sit down, focus on something, and produce work that meets a certain standard of achievement. I would say the more harmful slogan has been "you're okay just the way you are." I'm not saying we go back to harsh discipline and abuse, but there has to be a middle ground where we hold children, especially boys, to a higher standard.
      - TheOtherHobbes 4mo ago
        Boys have been sitting down, focusing, and producing work that meets a certain standard for most of recorded history. That ability is really not a uniquely feminine trait, and suggesting it is is honestly bizarre. Boys have also been doing more destructive things, but that's a different issue. Boys and girls do struggle with different issues socially and culturally, which is upstream of struggling with them academically. What's consistently missed that education is downstream of socialisation. The experience of learning as a first introduction to culture shapes consequences more than individual techniques do. Part of that is challenging all gender stereotypes. The traditional stereotype was that girls were frankly rather stupid and couldn't handle anything rigorous and challenging. Now the stereotype is that men lack focus, are disorganised, and have poor communication skills. One stereotype has been challenged, the other seems to have replaced it, and younger men have almost been encouraged to live down to it. I don't think as a culture we're emotionally mature enough yet to handle these issues in an effective way, and both education and socialisation will remain problematic until we do.
- SubmarineClub 4mo ago
  > There’s projections that college student populations will have shrinking male population. We're well past that. In fact, the gender gap in college graduation is now worse than it was when Title IX was passed. But because the gap favors women no one gives a shit -- many 'progressives' even celebrate it and continue to insist we need all these programs specifically to get women into college.
NoMoreNicksLeft 4mo ago
Any time you try to randomly assort 30 children of the same calendar age into a room with a single (or even several) teacher, it's going to be bad for nearly everyone except those in the very middle of the curve. A very narrow portion of that middle too. It can't not be. And if the teacher tries to cater to the slow kids and the "gifted" kids even a little, then the middle-of-the-curve children will suffer for that too. The problem isn't "education"... everyone not destined to be a feral caveman needs one. The problem is "public schools". The idea itself is wrong, and it can't be made to work. But our single-minded pursuit of it to the detriment of all other alternatives just compounds the trouble. Of the 50 people who end up reading my comment above, every one of you will read it a different way, and it's unlikely very many of you will read it as intended.
- in-silico 4mo ago
  > The problem is "public schools". The idea itself is wrong, and it can't be made to work. Do you have an alternative idea in mind?
- layman51 4mo ago
  It might have worked in the very distant past. I learned that there was once a monitorial system of education where a single teacher might be in charge of many students, but only because the teacher would get a lot of help from skilled students who would teach what they had learned to other students in their charge.
- kajecounterhack 4mo ago
  Isn't this just solved by better student teacher ratios, which you could totally have in public schools if they were funded better and societally we valued teachers more? What are private schools doing that you couldn't implement in public schools with adequate political will and money?
  - programjames 4mo ago
    Your question is easily resolved by looking up how much American schools are funded, compared to historical funding, other countries' funding, and their relative successes.
HDThoreaun 4mo ago
So the issue with this take imo is that one of the primary goals of schooling is to socialize kids and force them to interact with others they dont get along with. There needs to be some conflict among the students so that they can gain and practice conflict resolution skills that are absolutely vital. I agree that the current system can be improved, it's just not clear how.
- madrox 4mo ago
  My issue with saying socializing is one of the primary goals is that schools leave kids to figure it out on their own. Hard to know how schools are performing at that goal when it is going unmeasured.
  - bluGill 4mo ago
    Schools do better than home schooling. Those kids constantly do great on tests but it doesn't take long to figure out they are lacking socially. I don't know how to teach socialization other than kids figure it out, but I'm open to the idea.
    - bigstrat2003 4mo ago
      Some of those kids are lacking socially. It's not 100% by any means. The thing is that if you are home schooling your kids, you have to be intentional about socializing them in a way that you simply don't have to if you have them in a formal school setting. Obviously, some parents are going to fail at that but not all will.
      - HDThoreaun 4mo ago
        Well the thing is if youre home schooling it's really easy to just never have your kid interact with someone they dont get along with. Thats the most important part of the socialization though. If you dont put effort into making your kids life a little uncomfortable Im not sure how theyll gain those skills.

by madrox 4mo ago

pokstad 4mo ago

There’s something lopsided about education for boys. The system appears to favor girls heavily. There’s projections that college student populations will have shrinking male population. I think this is a systemic issue with school being built to favor a certain philosophy that isn’t well thought out for 50% of the population.

XorNot 4mo ago
What philosophy? The gender based outcomes people never seem able to come up with any coherent explanation of what they think the problem is other then to play to stereotypes.
- bilbo0s 4mo ago
  This. A math test is a math test is a math test. What's the math teacher supposed to do? I hate to be that guy, but I think it should be pointed out that asian boys don't seem to have much of a problem. If there's a gender bias, why do they succeed?
  - s5300 4mo ago
    [dead]
- rootusrootus 4mo ago
  The explanation that I’ve seen floated is behavioral. Boys are active and physical and don’t focus as easily as girls, who are more amenable to sitting quietly and paying attention. The idea is that the current predominant K12 style favors students in the latter behavior group. I have two kids in K12 and I don’t think it’s that simple. Not that I have a good explanation of my own, mind you.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - jplusequalt 4mo ago
    >who are more amenable to sitting quietly and paying attention Is this explanation not making a blatant assumption here that girls are statistically less hyperactive and distracted than boys?
    - rootusrootus 4mo ago
      Is that controversial (assuming otherwise normal children, excluding anybody with ADHD, etc)?
    - rocmcd 4mo ago
      "Hyperactive and distracted" is not necessarily the exact reason, but there is a large, well documented gap in performance for boys vs girls in elementary school (at least in the US).
- Avicebron 4mo ago
  > What philosophy? They might be referring to the TED Radio Hour "Beyond the manosphere" by Richard Reeves. I think it was on NPR a while ago, I looked it up because the "school isn't designed for boys but girls" sounded familiar.
- smelendez 4mo ago
  What confuses me is that the education system, especially the college track, was designed for men and boys. Lots of colleges didn’t even admit women, and they were largely excluded from learned professions like medicine, law, the ministry, engineering, etc. I haven’t really seen a good argument for what changed. I guess it’s possible that the school system was originally designed to teach young men skills, like quiet study and deference to authority, that women either learn more naturally or get reinforced in other contexts, and the schools no longer effectively teach those skills but still reward them.
rootusrootus 4mo ago
> projections that college student populations will have shrinking male population Projections? Aren’t we already there in reality? That future is today.
fasterik 4mo ago
It's not that the system favors a particular gender. The system favors personality traits like self-regulation, organization, and conscientiousness. These traits develop earlier on average in girls than in boys.
- parpfish 4mo ago
  i'm not sure if it's an issue of the educational system, but for at least several decades there has been a societal push to correct historical gender imbalances by encouraging girls to do well in school, go to college (especially STEM), get a career. This has resulted in kids seeing a lot of messaging along the lines of "Girl Power! Girls can do anything!". Which to an adult looks like a shift in the tides of history, but for one of the kids that's all they've ever seen and i think that has an effect.
  - fasterik 4mo ago
    It turns out that when you level the playing field, girls do better than boys. I don't think it's about the "girl power" nonsense, it's about the ability to sit down, focus on something, and produce work that meets a certain standard of achievement. I would say the more harmful slogan has been "you're okay just the way you are." I'm not saying we go back to harsh discipline and abuse, but there has to be a middle ground where we hold children, especially boys, to a higher standard.
    - TheOtherHobbes 4mo ago
      Boys have been sitting down, focusing, and producing work that meets a certain standard for most of recorded history. That ability is really not a uniquely feminine trait, and suggesting it is is honestly bizarre. Boys have also been doing more destructive things, but that's a different issue. Boys and girls do struggle with different issues socially and culturally, which is upstream of struggling with them academically. What's consistently missed that education is downstream of socialisation. The experience of learning as a first introduction to culture shapes consequences more than individual techniques do. Part of that is challenging all gender stereotypes. The traditional stereotype was that girls were frankly rather stupid and couldn't handle anything rigorous and challenging. Now the stereotype is that men lack focus, are disorganised, and have poor communication skills. One stereotype has been challenged, the other seems to have replaced it, and younger men have almost been encouraged to live down to it. I don't think as a culture we're emotionally mature enough yet to handle these issues in an effective way, and both education and socialisation will remain problematic until we do.
SubmarineClub 4mo ago
> There’s projections that college student populations will have shrinking male population. We're well past that. In fact, the gender gap in college graduation is now worse than it was when Title IX was passed. But because the gap favors women no one gives a shit -- many 'progressives' even celebrate it and continue to insist we need all these programs specifically to get women into college.

NoMoreNicksLeft 4mo ago

Any time you try to randomly assort 30 children of the same calendar age into a room with a single (or even several) teacher, it's going to be bad for nearly everyone except those in the very middle of the curve. A very narrow portion of that middle too. It can't not be. And if the teacher tries to cater to the slow kids and the "gifted" kids even a little, then the middle-of-the-curve children will suffer for that too. The problem isn't "education"... everyone not destined to be a feral caveman needs one. The problem is "public schools". The idea itself is wrong, and it can't be made to work. But our single-minded pursuit of it to the detriment of all other alternatives just compounds the trouble. Of the 50 people who end up reading my comment above, every one of you will read it a different way, and it's unlikely very many of you will read it as intended.

in-silico 4mo ago
> The problem is "public schools". The idea itself is wrong, and it can't be made to work. Do you have an alternative idea in mind?
layman51 4mo ago
It might have worked in the very distant past. I learned that there was once a monitorial system of education where a single teacher might be in charge of many students, but only because the teacher would get a lot of help from skilled students who would teach what they had learned to other students in their charge.
kajecounterhack 4mo ago
Isn't this just solved by better student teacher ratios, which you could totally have in public schools if they were funded better and societally we valued teachers more? What are private schools doing that you couldn't implement in public schools with adequate political will and money?
- programjames 4mo ago
  Your question is easily resolved by looking up how much American schools are funded, compared to historical funding, other countries' funding, and their relative successes.

HDThoreaun 4mo ago

So the issue with this take imo is that one of the primary goals of schooling is to socialize kids and force them to interact with others they dont get along with. There needs to be some conflict among the students so that they can gain and practice conflict resolution skills that are absolutely vital. I agree that the current system can be improved, it's just not clear how.

madrox 4mo ago
My issue with saying socializing is one of the primary goals is that schools leave kids to figure it out on their own. Hard to know how schools are performing at that goal when it is going unmeasured.
- bluGill 4mo ago
  Schools do better than home schooling. Those kids constantly do great on tests but it doesn't take long to figure out they are lacking socially. I don't know how to teach socialization other than kids figure it out, but I'm open to the idea.
  - bigstrat2003 4mo ago
    Some of those kids are lacking socially. It's not 100% by any means. The thing is that if you are home schooling your kids, you have to be intentional about socializing them in a way that you simply don't have to if you have them in a formal school setting. Obviously, some parents are going to fail at that but not all will.
    - HDThoreaun 4mo ago
      Well the thing is if youre home schooling it's really easy to just never have your kid interact with someone they dont get along with. Thats the most important part of the socialization though. If you dont put effort into making your kids life a little uncomfortable Im not sure how theyll gain those skills.